Broadhurst and Secretary, Department of Social Services (Social services second review)

This matter concerned an application for review of a decision by the Secretary of the Department of Social Services (DSS) to refuse the applicant's claim for a Disability Support Pension (DSP). The applicant claimed to have various physical and mental health conditions, including a lower limb condition, hypertension, and a mental health condition. The core dispute revolved around whether these impairments met the threshold for a DSP qualification, specifically whether they attracted an impairment rating of 20 points or more under the relevant Impairment Tables and whether the applicant had a continuing inability to work. The Administrative Appeals Tribunal (AAT) was tasked with determining these issues.

The Tribunal was required to consider several legal questions. Firstly, it needed to ascertain whether the applicant's medical impairments were fully diagnosed, fully treated, and fully stabilised during the relevant period. Secondly, the Tribunal had to determine if these conditions resulted in a functional impairment that attracted an Impairment Rating of 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables, either through a severe impairment under a single table or by completing a Program of Support. Finally, the Tribunal had to assess whether the applicant had a continuing inability to work.

In its reasoning, the Tribunal focused on the requirement for impairments to be fully diagnosed, treated, and stabilised before an Impairment Rating could be assigned. The Tribunal found that the applicant's mental health condition, in particular, had not been fully treated or stabilised during the relevant period, citing evidence of ongoing treatment needs and the applicant's own statements about medication. Consequently, the Tribunal concluded that the applicant's impairments did not attract the necessary 20 points or more under the Impairment Tables. As this threshold was not met, the Tribunal determined that the applicant did not satisfy the criteria under section 94(1)(b) of the Social Security Act 1991 for a DSP.

Given the finding that the applicant did not meet the impairment rating threshold, the Tribunal concluded that it was unnecessary to consider the further issue of whether the applicant had a continuing inability to work. Accordingly, the decision under review, which affirmed the refusal of the DSP, was affirmed by the Tribunal.